DATE AND TIME PUBLISHED: 16/6/2021 (WEDNESDAY), 11.32AM
WRITTEN BY: KAM2284D
1. NOR NADIA BINTI
AZMAN (2020899318)
2. INTAN NAZIFA BINTI
JONID (2020899312)
3. SITI NAJIHA BINTI SHAIFUL NIZAM
(2020862062)
4. MUHAMMAD ILHAM BIN MOHD AZHARI (2020608314)
5. AZREEN SHAHIRA BINTI MD ASRI
(2020483726)
Topic: 2001 Indian Parliament Attack
1.0
INTRODUCTION
The
2001 Indian Parliament attack was a terrorist attack on the Indian Parliament in
New Delhi, India on 13rd December 2001. The perpetrators were
members of Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM), the two group of people
raised by Pakistan where they are from terrorist organization. These two groups
of terrorists having the same ideologies, aims and motives where they are known
as an Islamic extremist. On December 13,
2001, five heavily-armed Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM)
terrorists stormed the Parliament complex in New Delhi and opened fire
The
terrorist targeting the parliament building, the attacker using mass shooting
and suicide bombing to attack Parliament of India in New Delhi, India. More than
100 people, including key politicians, were inside the parliament building at
that time. The gunmen used fake identity stickers on the cars they were driving
and thus breached security deployed around the parliament complex. The
terrorists carried AK47 rifles, grenade launchers, pistols and grenades to
attack the Indian Parliament
2.0 2001
INDIAN PARLIAMENT ATTACK (WHAT, WHY, WHERE, WHO)
On the date of 13th December 2001, a total
of five terrorist fully armed known as Jaish-e-Mohammed and Lashkar-e-Taiba
rushed the complex of Parliament located in New Delhi. The groups of terrorists
begun shooting randomly. This chaos had led to a total number of 14 death which
includes a civilian. These groups of terrorists are believed to be from
Pakistan
The
attack by the groups of terrorists occurred on 13th December 2001 during
morning hour. A total number of five terrorist went into the House Complex of
Parliament at estimated 11.40 am in the morning by using the ambassador model car
equipped with the sticker of Home Ministry on the car. However, the members of
the Parliament House Watch as well as staff of Ward became suspicious as the car
entered Building Gate Number 12. Due to this suspiciousness, the car which
included the terrorists was asked to turn back in a forceful manner. The car
then went out of control as it hit the vehicle belonged to the Vice President,
Krishan Kant. The terrorist then launched the open fire. During this time, the
security alarm in the Parliament compound was alerted which led to all the
entrances and exits to be closed. The open fire activity lasted for approximately
thirty to forty-five minutes. One of the extremists managed to reached Gate
Number 1 and this extremist was known as the human bomb. This extremist managed
to blew himself up. Later, the body was found incomplete without legs and arms.
From the open fire incident, a total of all five
terrorist were killed as well as a total of eight security officials and a
gardener. The five dead terrorists are known as Mohammad, Raja, Haider, Rana
and Hamza. A total number of minimum 15 to 22 people were injured as well in the
aftermath of the open fire. All the ministers and Members of Parliament in the
Parliament were reported to be untouched
According
to the Home Minister, L K Advani, made a claim with evidence that the terrorist
activity held in the Parliament House were initiated by Pakistan based
terrorist groups which are Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammad. The home
minister then added that the attack is the most alarming activity of terrorism
in the history of Pakistan-sponsored terrorism located in India
The
main conspirator behind the 2001 Parliament attack was Mohammed Afzal Guru. It was
believed that Afzal Guru was the connector between the terrorist groups. The
five terrorists whom attacked the Parliament had made a communication with
Jaish-e-Mohammed at 12th and 13th of December. In the
month of October 2001, Afzal placed rooms for both terrorists which were
Mohammed and Haider in Colony of Christian located in North Delhi and these
rooms were just a few kilometers away from Afzal’s house. The other three
terrorists were also given rooms. Here, identity cards which were fake were
given to the terrorists in order to execute the attack. The weapons used during
the Parliament attack was supplied by Mohammed Afzal from Srinagar. A vehicle
called white ambassador was purchased by Afzal from Lucky Motors. This vehicle
was equipped with red-beacon in order to make it look like a public official’s
vehicle. A week before the attack, the explosives were purchased from Khari
Baoli
3.0 REVIEW
3.1
CHALLENGES
3.1.1 There was
No Effort from Both Pakistani Government and Indian Government in Settling the
Issue.
The
ongoing conflict between both countries of Pakistan and India has been drag for
so many years. It can be said there was too little efforts taken in order in
combating with the problem caused by the terrorist group. Although the case has
received wide coverage and strong criticism towards government, but still no
effort and even in this case, there is no further discussion from both sides in
resolving the issues. It is as if the issue has never happened. But this is not
possible due to the lack of diplomatic relations or the indifference of the
Pakistani government towards Indian government. Thus, the speculation regarding
the indifference towards the Indian government by the Pakistani government is
getting stronger.
3.1.2 Weak
security system
During the attack, 9 people were killed including security guards. Having a group of terrorists easily enter the Parliament shows that the security system there was weak. It was fortunate that the group of terrorists’ timings was off and if it not many of the India’s senior political leader and officials may be killed on that day which will cause uproar in the country which will force the Government of India to strike back. This can be considered as extraordinary attack as the planned that been made by Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed was targeting important people of the country to be murder to caused huge conflicts. The security system is important in order to maintain peace therefore, having such a weak system will not bring anything good for its surrounding.
3.2 SIGNIFICANCE
The interest contained in the issue of the attack that took
place in 2001 in the first Indian parliament was to subdue the Indian
administrative system. As we know, India and Pakistan have not so good and
strained relations. Based on the attacks that took place in the parliament has
involved Pakistan, Delhi Police officials said that gunmen received
instructions from Pakistan and the operation was carried out under the guidance
of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency.
This indicates that mutual relations between India and Pakistan
have led to this incident. If it is true that this incident is highly despised
by the Pakistani government, why did they not take any action against the
criminals immediately. Therefore, this incident also seems to be meant to show
that Pakistan is greater than India.
Furthermore, Cathy Scott-Clark and Adrian Levy state that then-CIA station chief Robert Grenier and Ambassador Wendy Chamberlin suspected that the ISI had approved the attack in order to force the redeployment of troops under the command of Ali Jan Aurakzai away from the Durand Line, allowing Osama bin Laden to escape into Pakistan during the Battle of Tora Bora. Wanting to force the relocation of the team under the command of Ali Jan Aurakzai has led further the case from happening because it has the support of a organizations that has a lot of funds.
3.3 FACTORS
3.3.1 Weak
Security in Indian Parliament Building
A
weak security system where the security guards on duty during that time in the
parliament building were not aware to the arrival of terrorists who used fake
stickers to enter the Indian parliament building
3.3.2 The Motive
of Group Terrorist
A
war or an attack that takes place, is something unpredictable and we ourselves
do not know what the ideology or motive of the terrorist is. One of the factors
why attacks take place is, the terrorist wants to meet their ideology, motive,
aim, purpose and objective. That is why attacks can happen because they want to
expand its spread about religion in a violent and aggressive way. The
perpetrators were members of Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM),
where they are having the same motive, aim and objective to attack Indian
Parliament Building. Lashkar-e-Tayyiba (LeT) is a Pakistan-based radical
organization founded in the late 1980s operating in the Indian states of
Kashmir and Jammu. One of the objectives is to force the entry of Indian administered
Kashmir into Pakistan and to create two Islamic-controlled states, in the North
and in the South of India. Lashkar-e-Tayyiba (LeT) activities include suicide
bombings and armed attacks on civilians, government officials and Indian
security forces
Jaish-e-Mohammed
(JeM) founded in early 2000, this organization is an Islamist extremist group
based in Pakistan. Its objectives are to absorb the Indian-administered areas
of Jammu and Kashmir into Pakistan and ultimately establish an Islamist state
in the country. Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) is committed to using indiscriminate
terror tactics to achieve its objectives, including targeting foreigners and
political representatives of foreign states
3.4 THE
IMPACTS OF THE 2001 PARLIAMENT ATTACK IN NEW DELHI
3.4.1 Security in Parliament Area is Enhanced
The
Parliament attack in 2001 shows that the security system in the Parliament was
full of flaws. If the security was flawless no such attack will exist in the
first place. In order to prevent any future attacks by the terrorist, the
security system needs to be enhanced or upgraded. Since the 2001 attack, the
procedures in dealing with security management have been improvised or
introduced a new one in order to combat with terrorism issues especially in
dealing with the terrorist modus operandi that poses an extreme danger towards
the Parliament. The coordination in security management of the Parliament is
between Central Reserve Police Force, Indo-Tibetan Border Police, Intelligence
Bureau, Delhi Police, Special Protection Group, National Security Guards and
Parliamentary Security Service
The
security measures are very tight when it comes to entering the Parliament
complex. In order to enter the Parliament compound, a thorough authorization,
identification, verification is needed from the individuals who would want to
enter the Parliament compound. This action is done with the security devices
that are modern. The outer area of the Parliament is also heavily secured. The
Parliament Duty Group (PDG) which consist of a total number of 1500 armed
officials has the role to ensure the security in the outer area of the
Parliament. This group of officials also need to ensure the overall safety of
the Parliament area. This includes the main house of Parliament, house annexe
of the Parliament, reception as well as the Parliament library called Sansadiya
Gyanpeeth. The Parliament Duty Group is not standing alone as it is being
helped by Parliamentary Security Service (PSS) in order to ensure the safeness
of members of Parliament, VVIPs as well as other visitors. Other agency such as
the National Security Guards (NSG) also helped in ensuring the Parliament peace
and this agency is fully equipped with modern devices and weapons that are new.
When
it comes to ensuring the security on the road side, commandos of Special Weapon
and Tactics (SWAT) of Delhi as well as units in charge of bomb detections are
placed on the road. These two authorities will monitor every road that leads to
the complex of the Parliament. The parliament is under the surveillance of the
CCTV all the time. Authority that is in charge of shooting is known as
sharpshooters are placed in places that are strategic and on standby all the
time. One order and the sharpshooter will release the bullet to the suspect. The
security officials will be recognizing the ministers and members of parliament
as well as their assistants, reporters, clerks and any authorized party that is
allowed to enter the Parliament compound
3.4.2 Introduction of New Enacted Act Called the
Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA)
The
incident of 2001 Parliament Attack by groups of terrorists shows that the
previous existing law to cope with terrorism is not effective as it failed to
stop the terrorist from attacking the Parliament. Due to this, an Act has been
introduced and implemented in June 2002. The Act is known as “The Prevention of
Terrorism Act (POTA) 2002”. This was one of the initiatives in order to support
the operations of anti-terrorism in India. Among the important features
included in POTA was the suspected individual can be in detention for maximum
180 days without having to file charges through courts. Next, protects the
witnesses by hiding their identities. Moreover, the Act allows treating a
confession as an admission of offence to the police. Under this POTA act,
approximately 800 individuals were held in jail. The largest area that
contributed to the number of arrests can be seen in Jharkhand state. However,
POTA was revoked in 2004 due to the misuse of the Act
3.4.3 Standoff between India and Pakistan
The
2001 Parliament attack in New Delhi India was claimed to be from Pakistan based
terrorists which were Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed. However, the
government of Pakistan denied this claim, whereby, the attacks were not caused
by the any groups based in Pakistan. Due to not meeting this mutual agreement
and claim between India and Pakistan, a number of politicians from India urged
the government of India to take actions against Pakistan. The Prime Minister of
India, Atal Bihari Vajpayee through its administration have placed an order
regarding the military mobilization and requested for the Pakistan to remove
the groups of militants that operates against the state of India from the
territory of Pakistan as well as Kashmir. The Prime Minister of India made a
statement, whereby, the act of terrorism will be taken further action and
military officials or force will be the option to consider. As a respond
towards the India government, Pakistan also decided to prepare its army in the
army mobilization. Thus, the army from both sides are facing one and another in
the area of Line of Control located in Kashmir
The
government of India have decided to further this action with stopping
transportation such as train and bus services between India and Pakistan. The
air assets from Pakistan were also banned from using the air space in India.
Economic activity such as trade activity between the two countries is no longer
active. Pakistan decided to cut the diplomatic staff located in New Delhi as a
respond towards India
During
the meeting of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC),
both the Prime Minister of India and Pakistan had attended this meeting which
was held in Nepal. The Foreign Minister from these two states were also present
during the summit of SAARC. A statement has been made by these two states to
the media claiming of wanting a reconciliation and the defuse of crisis.
Pakistan have led the first move by asking for dialogue resumption from India.
The Prime Minister of India, Vajpayee, have set several grounds in order for
the talk resumption to happen. First, the arrest and deportation of a total of
20 individuals which consist of the Indian locals staying in Pakistan. Second,
India demanded for Pakistan to close any assistance to terrorist operating from
Pakistan whether directly or indirectly such as the closure of training camps
and arms supply routes. Third, a clear and categorical renunciation of
terrorism towards all manifestations
Due
to the ground laid down by India, the leaders of Pakistan have responded and
executed an arrest towards the leaders of both terrorist groups that were
responsible for the 2001 attack in Parliament known as Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed.
The Inter Service Intelligence in Pakistan was shut down and members of these
terrorist groups were arrested. These efforts made by Pakistan have been
recognized as a positive thing by India
3.5 RECOMMENDATIONS
3.5.1 The
need of special long-term laws to combat terrorism.
According
to experts, the government's response to terrorist acts has been patchy. This
implies that India's counter-terrorism actions appear to be in a cyclical pattern.
The government appears to take short-term remedies soon after an incident
occurs. India lacks a unified strategic response to terrorism, according to
retired Major General Sheru Thapliyal, who works at the Center for Land Warfare
Studies in New Delhi. There is no doctrine, and the majority of replies are
reflexive (Kaplan & Bajoria, 2008The Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA), as
well as the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1973 and the Indian Penal Code, can
assist in the investigation and prosecution of crimes, but not in the
prevention of terrorism (Babu, 2010). Furthermore, the Manmohan Singh
government abolished POTA in 2014 (Rai, 2020)
3.5.2 Terms
and implementations of counter-terrorism act should clearly highlight.
To
avoid misuse of the Act established, the Government of India should clearly
specify the parameters of law and execution while creating and executing
counter-terrorism legislation. Gujarat was the epicentre of POTA abuse along
sectarian and minority lines. With the exception of one, all of Gujarat's POTA
inmates were Muslims, and law enforcement agents appeared to be ignoring the
limited protections in place to protect these prisoners from mistreatment. According to Amnesty International, police detained people
for days or weeks without access to family members or lawyers, thwarted habeas
corpus proceedings, and threatened to imprison family members if they filed a
petition with the government under POTA. Despite POTA restrictions restricting
the validity of self-incriminating comments, some inmates claimed they were
tortured into confessing. Some police officers in Gujarat seemed to have
combined official bias with personal bias and poor police work.
Gujarat,
however, was not the only state that unjustly targeted Muslim minority. Two
Kashmiri Muslim students were detained in Uttar Pradesh in April 2003 for
allegedly sympathising with a Muslim terrorist organisation. Every Kashmiri in
a student-heavy part of the state became a suspect in a massive probe. Investigators
combed through school data, and school administrators kept an eye on Kashmiri
kids (Gagn, n.d.).
3.5.3 Enhancement
of security in Parliament
If
security procedures had been kept tight and severe, the 2001 Parliament
assaults would not have occurred. The hack highlighted several gaps in the
Parliament's security infrastructure, which must be addressed in order to
prevent future assault on India's democracy throne. Over the years, various
security processes have been implemented in the security management to combat
terrorists' methods of attack on the Parliament. Parliament's current security
management include collaboration between multiple security forces, notably the
Intelligence Bureau and the Parliamentary Security Service (Rai, 2020).
4.0
CONCLUSION
Since
its independence in 1947, India has been the target of many insurgencies and
acts of terrorism. India has been at war for more than fifty years, and it has
learnt a lot from its achievements and mistakes. The scale of the attacks, as
well as the damage they produce, has only grown with time. The Indian military
is currently fighting its greatest anti-terror combat near the border,
following heavy-handed operations within Punjab. Because of the extensive
misuse and unpopularity of TADA, legislators decided to add more protections in
POTA. However, abuses exist, and learning must continue. India has to keep
refining broad definitions of terrorist offences to avoid arbitrary detentions
prompted by politics, prejudice, or haste.
5.0 REFERENCES
6.0 APPENDICES
Figure
1: The picture of Afzal Guru.
Figure 2: The image of parliament
building.
0 comments:
Post a Comment